Representing with frozen@mid80, toggle transitions/locations to macros, or frag.

The genome is not able to self-modify to become the genome of a different species.

Allah is able to publish new species -- how Adam (a.s.) was the first human. New.

frozen@mid80 1.1 was not containing all of the 1.4 content. No amount of formal-net expressing within 1.1, would get to the 1.4 -- although they look almost similar. New.

(In contrast, copycat83 was not new. Still not available. A baseless wish, or lie!)

anti-evolutionist computing

frozen@mid80 is refuting the evolutionist fallacy of confusing genetics with Darwin's sci-fi.

If representations (mid80.frz files) combine, they might less likely have monitorable (non-recursive) "offsprings" -- if their logic/hierarchies internally oppose/interfere.

Thus, frozen@mid80 is able for (micro-)"speciation" -- although not able to evolve.

To accommodate the "evolution" concept into where there is none, they might prefix that with terms like "micro-" or "rapid-" but that is not evolution, at all. The thing might have internal mechanism to rapidly express the genome, when encountering new cases. That is the stem-cells, and epigenetics issues.

frozen@mid80 is processing formal-nets with explicit data. The frag "?", or X-transition (if/else switching) is allowing lots of self-reflective behavior within the net operation -- equivalent to the (non-available mechanism of) modifying (rewriting) the procedures of a remote transition, and that is equivalent to toggling that transition with a macro. Thus, actually the formal-net programming with frozen@mid80 (or, form@fix) is equivalent to how stem-cells [and, cancer tumors] structurally grow.

gene-expression

There might be two types of changes to a software

internally-settable (then, revokable)

internally not available. Might only patch externally, or publish new software.

The first type is no change of the genome/software, because people might accomplish only-and-all of what that genome/software had been able to provide.

Only with a full knowledge of the gene-expression, we might know what are the genomic flexibilities.

frozen@mid80 is a software on disk, thus knowable byte by byte. But if that were only a software service, through a web site, then you would not see the gene-expression mechanism. That would resemble the biological cases, that we have no visible gene-expression (the software bytes of the working logic), as opposed to the genome (the macro-linking hierarchies, data, that we might interact materially).

frozen@mid80 is listing the genome (through "Find from list" & "Representing") openly -- expression with a formal logic. Scientists try to infer a logic from data.

Knocking-out some gene (or, a few), to see what would not work, is not guaranteeing that, that gene is the single gene necessary for that thing to work.

reproductively, frozen@mid80

frozen@mid80 is containing the genome data, as well as the working software. To "reproduce" the third, from two mid80.frz files, is processing that as data. (Similar to how RNA is active in meiosis?)

Although the software is external, that is the normal genomic dynamism -- totally equivalent to what is doable from within the frozen@mid80 menues. Not evolving.

Warning: Keep consistent. For example, mix 1.4 with only 1.4. New software is new gene-expression. In the nature, that is not materially available, but if modifying the file externally, you see not only the genome (the formal net portion), but the binary of the software, too. Your computer platform is probably not likely to welcome the corrupt file structure, if you cut&paste the gene-expression, along with the genes.

The following C program is sufficient to combine two mid80.frz (renamed to mid80.1 & mid80.2).

frozen@mid80 is a cozy tool for crafting (hand-made) genome files. If merely byte-mixing is not sufficient for your taste, then work through frozen@mid80, to modify the net how you wish -- commanding the phenotype. (For living things, that is Allah who commands His servants, angels, to set the fate/phenotype of individuals.)

Normally, if too different, the "offspring" might be not runnable (in monitoring). (Like recursiveness, because of having cut&pasted some conflicting net hierarchies.)

non-mutations

But that would not necessarily work right, as of frozen@mid80 1.4. Why not? Well, that is illustrative of the nature of biological (non-)mutations. Therefore, I might tell of this (1.4) even when (in the future) frozen@mid80 might allow combining byte-by-byte, trivially. First, think the biology of meiosis.

The genes are made of bits of nucleotides (A-T is 0, C-G is 1, or vice versa).

Bits are not cuttable. Thus "mutation" is not at physical/chemical minimum. Not atoms.

If genes are cuttable freely, the gene-expression must be expressing all combinations.

If genes are not cuttable freely, meiosis must be knowing where cutting is forbidden.

frozen@mid80 (as of 1.4) is referring to procedures as pointers, thus not cuttable byte-by-byte (let alone bit-by-bit), because the resulting combination might not necessarily be valid for having a procedure [of that type, or at all]. Thus, if your macro definitions differ in the two mid80.frz, in procedures of their transitions, then the software might simply crash.